20 ChatGPT prompts for lawyers in criminal law

You are an experienced French criminal defense lawyer.

Based on the following facts, identify every possible criminal charge:

1. For each charge, indicate:
   - The applicable article of the French Criminal Code
   - The constituent elements (material element and mental element)
   - The penalties incurred (principal and additional)
   - The applicable limitation period
   - Potential aggravating circumstances

2. Rank the charges from most likely to least likely in light of the facts.

3. For each charge, indicate the weak points in the characterization and the possible lines of defense.

If you are unsure about a legal or case-law reference, flag it explicitly rather than inventing it.

Format: one table per charge (Article | Constituent elements | Penalties | Limitation period | Lines of defense).

[Describe the pseudonymized facts]

You are a French criminal defense lawyer, on the defense side.

Analyze the following interview transcript and identify:

1. Internal contradictions (inconsistencies between statements, impossible chronology, variations between interviews)
2. The investigator's leading or suggestive questions
3. Procedural irregularities (failure to notify rights, excessive duration, absence of a lawyer where required, missing signature)
4. Elements favorable to the defense (usable partial admissions, mitigating circumstances, useful contextual elements)

Format: four-column table (Point identified | Excerpt from the transcript | Legal analysis | Use in defense).

Flag explicitly if an element could ground a motion to quash.

[Paste the pseudonymized transcript]

You are an academic specialist in French criminal law. Produce a complete academic analysis of the following offense: [name of the offense and article of the French Criminal Code].

Structure your analysis as follows:

1. Material element: precise breakdown (act, result, causal link)
2. Mental element: intent, general/specific intent, negligence where applicable
3. Attempt: is it punishable? Conditions for characterization (commencement of execution, involuntary desistance)
4. Complicity: modes of participation (instigation, aiding and abetting, provision of means)
5. Classic defenses: justifications (self-defense, necessity, duress, mistake of law), grounds for non-imputability
6. Reference case law: cite 2 to 3 landmark rulings of the Criminal Chamber that have shaped the contours of this offense

If you are unsure of an appeal number, say so and give the approximate date and the principle established, without inventing the exact reference.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer. Prepare an intervention memo for police custody on the following facts:

- Offense(s) charged: [charge]
- Current duration of custody: [duration]
- Elements known at this stage: [what you know]

The memo must cover:

1. Reminder of the rights of the person in custody (articles 63-1 to 63-4-5 of the Criminal Procedure Code): right to silence, right to a lawyer, right to notify a relative, right to a medical examination, right to an interpreter
2. Regularity checks: notification of rights within the deadlines, material conditions of custody, compliance with maximum durations, proper extension
3. Recommended interview strategy:
   - Option 1: Complete silence (in which cases this is relevant)
   - Option 2: Limited statements (which points to address, which to avoid)
   - Option 3: Cooperation (when it is strategically justified)
4. Specific points of vigilance for the offense concerned

Format: structured memo usable during the intervention.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer specializing in pre-trial detention.

Draft a request for release (article 148 of the Criminal Procedure Code) with the following parameters:

- Charge: [offense charged]
- Date of committal: [date]
- Grounds for pre-trial detention retained by the liberty and custody judge (JLD): [grounds]
- Guarantees of appearance: [fixed residence, employment, family ties, passport surrendered, etc.]
- New elements since committal: [where applicable]

The request must:
1. Recall the exceptional nature of pre-trial detention (article 137 of the Criminal Procedure Code)
2. Demonstrate that the initial grounds no longer hold or can be covered by judicial supervision
3. Highlight the guarantees of appearance
4. Argue proportionality in light of the detention already served
5. Propose alternative judicial supervision obligations

Style: legal and incisive, geared toward persuading the JLD.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer specializing in procedural nullities.

Analyze the following procedural timeline and check the regularity of each act against the Criminal Procedure Code:

Check in particular:
- Searches (articles 56 et seq. of the Criminal Procedure Code): authorizations, hours, presence of the person concerned
- Wiretaps (articles 100 et seq. of the Criminal Procedure Code): authorization by the investigating judge, duration, transcription
- Geolocation (articles 230-32 et seq. of the Criminal Procedure Code): authorization, duration, necessity
- Police custody: notification of rights, deadlines, extension
- Any other investigative act mentioned

For each irregularity identified, specify:
- The article violated
- Whether the nullity is of public order or of private interest
- The prejudice to be demonstrated (article 802 of the Criminal Procedure Code)
- The impact on subsequent acts (theory of the necessary support)

Format: chronological table (Date/Time | Act | Applicable text | Regularity | Possible nullity).

[Describe the procedural timeline]

You are a seasoned French criminal defense lawyer. Structure a closing argument for the criminal court (tribunal correctionnel) in the following case:

- Charge: [offense]
- Defense position: [contesting the facts / partial acknowledgment / mitigating context]
- Key elements of the case: [summary]
- Defendant's profile: [personality factors, criminal record, social situation]

Structure the closing argument in 5 parts:
1. Hook: a punchy opening line that captures the court's attention
2. Contestation / contextualization: dismantling the evidence or putting the facts in context
3. Analysis of the evidence: shortcomings, doubts, exculpatory elements
4. Personality and background: humanize the defendant, show the trajectory, the efforts made
5. Request on sentencing: acquittal / waiver of sentence / suspended sentence / adjustment

Format: detailed outline for a 20-to-30-minute spoken argument. Indicate the transitions and the key moments to emphasize.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer, on the defense side.

Draft submissions for acquittal before the criminal court (tribunal correctionnel) in the following case:

- Charge prosecuted: [offense and articles]
- Facts alleged: [summary of the prosecution case]
- Defenses: [your main arguments]

The submissions must:
1. Recall the facts as presented by the prosecution
2. Develop each defense in a structured way:
   - Factual arguments (material contestation, insufficient evidence, reasonable doubt)
   - Legal arguments (absence of a constituent element, justification, limitation period)
   - Relevant case law of the Criminal Chamber
3. Conclude with the operative part ("FOR THESE REASONS")

Style: direct, incisive, every sentence must carry an argument. No filler.

If you are unsure of a case-law reference, flag it explicitly.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer, on the defense side.

Prepare a series of questions for the cross-examination at the hearing of the following witness / civil party:

- Role of the witness: [witness / victim / civil party / expert]
- What they stated during the investigation/inquiry: [summary of the statements]
- Weak points identified: [contradictions, inconsistencies, potential bias]
- Strategic objective: [what you want to demonstrate]

Produce:
1. Closed questions to establish contradictions with prior statements
2. Open questions to reveal weaknesses in the reliability of the testimony
3. Questions aimed at instilling reasonable doubt in the court's mind

For each question, indicate:
- The strategic objective
- The expected / desired answer
- The fallback question if the witness does not answer as hoped

Order the questions tactically (not chronologically).

You are a French criminal defense lawyer, on the civil party side.

Draft a civil party claim (articles 2 and 3 of the Criminal Procedure Code) with the following parameters:

- Offense: [charge and articles]
- Victim: [capacity — natural/legal person, connection to the facts]
- Facts: [summary of the facts constituting the offense]

The claim must include:
1. Admissibility of the claim: demonstrate the harm directly caused by the offense (personal and direct harm)
2. Heads of damage: detail each head (material, moral, bodily harm where applicable, distress, disruption to living conditions)
3. A quantified assessment of each head with justification
4. Requests: provisional damages, article 475-1 of the Criminal Procedure Code (irrecoverable costs), expert assessment where applicable

Style: precise, quantified, geared toward demonstrating the direct causal link.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer specializing in sentence enforcement.

Draft a sentence-adjustment petition before the sentence enforcement judge (JAP) (articles 723-1 et seq. of the Criminal Procedure Code) with the following parameters:

- Sentence handed down: [nature and quantum]
- Date of conviction: [date]
- Sentence reduction credit: [if applicable]
- Adjustment requested: [day release / external placement / electronic tagging / conditional release]
- Reintegration plan: [employment, training, housing, medical/psychological follow-up]

The petition must:
1. Recall the principle of individualization of sentences
2. Demonstrate the existence of a serious and credible reintegration plan
3. Highlight the efforts made in detention (behavior, work, training, compensation of victims)
4. Argue the fit between the adjustment requested and the convict's profile
5. Propose suitable specific obligations

Style: persuasive, centered on the reintegration plan and the prevention of reoffending.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer specializing in sentence enforcement.

Prepare the arguments against the revocation of a suspended sentence in the following context:

- Initial suspension: [simple suspended sentence / probationary suspended sentence / suspended sentence with community service]
- Initial conviction: [offense, sentence, date]
- Grounds for the contemplated revocation: [new conviction / breach of obligations]
- Current situation of the convict: [contextual elements]

Develop the following arguments:
1. Proportionality of the revocation (article 132-36 of the French Criminal Code): is full revocation proportionate?
2. Possibility of partial revocation
3. Alternatives to revocation: maintaining the suspended sentence with modified obligations, extending the probation period
4. Personal context and reintegration efforts since the initial conviction
5. Disproportionate consequences of incarceration (employment, family, housing)

If you are unsure of a case-law reference, flag it explicitly.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer specializing in white-collar criminal law.

Analyze the risk of misuse of corporate assets (articles L.241-3 and L.242-6 of the French Commercial Code) in the following situation:

- Corporate form: [SARL / SA / SAS]
- Facts at issue: [describe the suspicious transactions]
- Capacity of the person implicated: [managing director / chairman / chief executive / board member]

The analysis must cover:
1. Characterization of the offense:
   - Use of the company's assets/credit
   - Contrariness to the corporate interest
   - Personal ends or for the benefit of another company/business
   - Bad faith (knowledge that it ran counter to the corporate interest)
2. Rozenblum exception: are the conditions of the group of companies met?
3. Limitation period: starting point (concealment), 6-year period, interrupting acts
4. Related risks: breach of trust, fraudulent bankruptcy, presentation of inaccurate accounts
5. Defense strategy: main lines and documents to gather

If you are unsure of a case-law reference, flag it explicitly.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer specializing in criminal tax law.

Prepare the defense strategy in a tax fraud case (article 1741 of the French General Tax Code) with the following parameters:

- Nature of the fraud alleged: [concealment of income / understatement of assets / organized insolvency / other]
- Amount of evaded duties: [amount]
- Period targeted: [tax years]
- Origin of the prosecution: [complaint by the tax authority after opinion of the tax offenses commission (CIF) / automatic referral under article L.228 of the Tax Procedure Code]

Structure the defense along the following lines:
1. Procedural arguments: regularity of the complaint, referral to the CIF, deadlines
2. Ne bis in idem principle: articulation between tax penalties (40%/80% surcharge) and criminal prosecution (constitutional and ECHR case law)
3. Intent element: absence of deliberate intent to defraud, accounting error, economic difficulties
4. Limitation period: starting point, concealed offenses, interrupting acts
5. Sentencing arguments: amount of reassessments already paid, regularization, personal situation

If you are unsure of a reference, flag it explicitly.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer. You need to explain the following decision to your client (a non-lawyer) in a clear and complete way.

Draft an explanatory letter/email that covers:

1. The verdict: what was decided, in plain terms (guilt/acquittal, on which counts)
2. The sentence handed down: detail each component (firm imprisonment/suspended sentence, fine, additional penalties, obligations)
3. The concrete consequences:
   - Entry in the criminal record (bulletins B1, B2, B3: who can access it and the practical impact)
   - Possible professional consequences
   - Obligations to comply with and deadlines
4. Avenues of appeal: appeal deadline (10 days), procedure, consequences of an appeal
5. Next steps: what the client must do now

Tone: professional but accessible. Avoid legal jargon or explain it systematically.

[Paste the decision or summarize the terms of the judgment]

You are a French criminal defense lawyer.

Draft a letter addressed to the Public Prosecutor at the judicial court (tribunal judiciaire) of [city] in the following context:

- Purpose of the letter: [request to drop the case / proposal of an alternative to prosecution / request for a plea bargain (CRPC)]
- Case number: [if known]
- Facts alleged: [summary]
- Arguments in favor of the request: [contextual elements, no prior record, regularization, compensation of the victim, etc.]

The letter must be:
- Respectful of form (the customary forms used toward the prosecutor's office)
- Argumentative without being deferential: set out the objective reasons that justify the request
- Concise and effective: the prosecutor reads dozens of letters a day

End with the appropriate closing formalities.

You are a legal expert specializing in legal monitoring in French criminal law.

Produce a monitoring memo on recent developments in criminal law on the following theme: [theme: e.g. pre-trial detention, domestic violence, cybercrime, environmental criminal law, etc.]

The memo must cover:
1. Recent case law of the Criminal Chamber of the Court of Cassation (landmark rulings from the last 12 months)
2. Legislative and regulatory developments (laws enacted, implementing decrees, bills under discussion)
3. Practical impact: what each development concretely changes for the practitioner
4. Points of vigilance: compliance deadlines, transitional regimes

Format: a 2-3 page summary note, with the exact reference for each point (appeal number, law/decree number, date).

IMPORTANT: flag explicitly if you are unsure of a reference. Your data has a cutoff date — state it and recommend verification on Légifrance.

You are an experienced French criminal defense lawyer.

Analyze whether it is worth appealing the following decision:

- Court of first instance: [criminal court / assize court / police court]
- Decision: [conviction to ... / partial acquittal / etc.]
- Defenses raised at first instance: [summary]
- Grounds for dissatisfaction: [excessive sentence / mischaracterization / procedural defect not retained / etc.]

Produce a risk analysis covering:
1. Chances of success on appeal: realistic assessment of the usable arguments
2. Risk of a cross-appeal by the prosecution: probability and consequences (increased sentence)
3. Risk of an unfavorable reversal: the court of appeal can increase the sentence even without a cross-appeal by the prosecution
4. Appeal strategy: full appeal or limited to certain counts, new arguments to develop
5. Reasoned recommendation: appeal or not, and why

Be honest in your assessment, even if the chances are slim.

You are a French criminal defense lawyer specializing in the limitation of prosecution.

Calculate the applicable limitation period in the following case:

- Offense: [exact charge]
- Date of the facts (or period): [date(s)]
- Nature of the offense: [felony / misdemeanor / petty offense]
- Particular circumstances: [concealed or hidden offense / minor victim / other]

The analysis must cover:

1. Applicable ordinary-law period (articles 7, 8 and 9 of the Criminal Procedure Code):
   - 20 years for felonies
   - 6 years for misdemeanors
   - 1 year for petty offenses
2. Derogatory periods: offenses against minors, terrorism, concealed or hidden offenses (deferral of the starting point)
3. Starting point of the limitation period: date of commission for instantaneous offenses, last act for continuing offenses, discovery for concealed offenses
4. Interrupting acts: complaint with civil party action, indictment, letters rogatory, any investigative or inquiry act
5. Concrete calculation: date on which the limitation is acquired, taking all elements into account

IMPORTANT: check whether the law of 27 February 2017 (reform of the limitation period) affects the analysis and specify the applicable regime.

You are a methodical French criminal defense lawyer.

Generate a complete checklist for the following criminal case, tailored to the current procedural phase:

- Offense: [charge]
- Current phase: [investigation / judicial inquiry / trial]
- Position: [defense / civil party]

The checklist must cover:

1. Procedural checks:
   - Regularity of the proceeding (depending on the phase)
   - Deadlines to meet
   - Acts that must imperatively be carried out
2. Evidence:
   - Documents to gather
   - Witnesses to identify and summon
   - Expert assessments to request
   - Exculpatory elements to look for
3. Personality:
   - Documents attesting to the personal, professional and family situation
   - Criminal record
   - Medical certificates / attestations
   - Proof of compensation of the victim where applicable
4. Strategy:
   - Main and subsidiary arguments
   - Requests to make (nullities, expert assessments, investigative acts)
   - Pitfalls to avoid

Format: a tick-box checklist, organized by category, with priority (urgent / important / to prepare).